Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
Marc Gemis schreef op 12/11/2014 om 5:34: On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 8:36 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: e) the word fuzzy is removed from OSM, at least for routing, that is. Could you be less fuzzy ? :-) and please list the actions one could take to remove fuzzy from OSM? regards m ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be Hi, Very interesting. Something that seems easy and used from the early days of OSM is sensitive for personal interpret. Good link: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Cycle_lanes_in_oneway_motor_car_roads image with possible tag next to it. Like it @ André Click FileDownload from OSMBounding Box and you have a OSM.org URL to copypaste down below. I think that's what you're asking. Indeed almost, its the generally view of what I selected for download, but the zoom in link in this examples was de roundabout to point to. @Marc Sorry no German at all. (English, French use of Google translate and other online translators) Frank ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Jakka vdmfrank...@gmail.com wrote: Very interesting. Something that seems easy and used from the early days of OSM is sensitive for personal interpret. Good link: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Cycle_lanes_in_ oneway_motor_car_roads image with possible tag next to it. Like it Zit ook in de Benelux preset voor JOSM. Met de letter-cijfer combinatie, zonder beelden evenwel. 'k zou kunnen proberen om die er ook in te stoppen. mvg m ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
This roundabout was already in the sytem with all the details separated footway, cycle way, highway. hope better link. (How taken a link of josm screen ? permalink?) https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=50.788276%2C3.133957point=50.794787%2C3.137348vehicle=bikeelevation=truelayer=Lyrk Marc Gemis schreef op 11/11/2014 om 11:57: Weird, I always thought that you do not have to add oneway=yes to a roundabout, in case it is tagged as junction=roundabout. For the route you specified, I don't see any separately drawn cycleways. Anyway, do not forget to tag the main road with bicycle=use_sidepath in such case. And to properly connect the cycleway with all crossings, including T-crossing on the other side of the road. regards m On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Jakka vdmfrank...@gmail.com mailto:vdmfrank...@gmail.com wrote: Tried out route planner for bikes and saw in my region that the planner takes the wrong side of the road. https://graphhopper.com/maps/?__point=50.788276%2C3.133957__point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%__208930%2C%20Menin%2C%__20Belgiumvehicle=bike__elevation=truelayer=Lyrk https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=50.788276%2C3.133957point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%208930%2C%20Menin%2C%20Belgiumvehicle=bikeelevation=truelayer=Lyrk The roundabout I will correct it to oneway=yes but other roads with the lane on both side of the roads must they been change one by one to oneway=yes -- Jakka ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
I think the correct key is : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway:bicycle Since it is standard to allow bicycles to use both direction, also in a one-way street it's allowed unless specifically restricted. Glenn On 11-11-14 11:41, Jakka wrote: Tried out route planner for bikes and saw in my region that the planner takes the wrong side of the road. https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=50.788276%2C3.133957point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%208930%2C%20Menin%2C%20Belgiumvehicle=bikeelevation=truelayer=Lyrk The roundabout I will correct it to oneway=yes but other roads with the lane on both side of the roads must they been change one by one to oneway=yes -- Everything is going to be 200 OK.http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway:bicycle ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
Sorry but oneway=yes just means you can only drive in the direction of the way. It has nothing to do with going opposite. I quote: The oneway tag is used to indicate the access restriction on highways and other linear features as appropriate. So it's an access restriction. On highway=cycleway it's the same , standard is that you can use it both ways unless specified you can't. There are seperate cycleways on this road we are talking about btw but they are restricted with oneway=yes. Glenn On 11-11-14 14:44, Ben Laenen wrote: On Tuesday 11 November 2014 13:12:15 Glenn Plas wrote: I think the correct key is : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway:bicycle Since it is standard to allow bicycles to use both direction, also in a one-way street it's allowed unless specifically restricted. No, it's the opposite: oneway=yes restricts all drivers to go the opposite direction, whether you're driving a car, a bicycle, a horse or herding a cow or whatever your mode of transport (except on foot, you're not a driver then). Ben ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
Gilbert, Dit is geen discussie over de wegcode maar over de betekenis van tags en het resultaat ervan. Het intereseert me zelfs niet wat de wegcode ervan vindt in het kader van deze materie. Ik heb het dus niet over de wegcode maar over de betekenis van de keys. Laat dit duidelijk zijn dat hier wel af en toe een groot verschil tussen zit.. De standaard is -evenals wagens- mogen fietsers in OSM op het fietspad in 2 richtingen rijden tenzij restricties worden gelegd. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway Bij: cycleway, zoals highway kan je daar in 2 richtingen over rijden tenzij verboden. De highway tag werkt hetzelfde. Dus zonder restricties is dat de standaard. op junction=roundabout is de oneway=yes impliciet, maar niet op de aparte cycleway, dat is namelijk geen junction. Hebben jullie dit stuk al opengedaan in JOSM , het is echt wel een aparte cycleway, dus heeft geen bal te maken met die junction. Kijk naar de tags aub. Glenn On 11-11-14 13:39, Gilbert Hersschens wrote: Moet een bug in de route planner zijn. OSM vermeldt dat ronde punten impliciet éénrichtingsstraten zijn: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout (definitie: A roundabout is a /one-way/ street with /right-of-way/ and a /non-traversable http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Non-traversable/ center island.). @Glenn: kijk de wegcode nog eens na. Voor fietsers gelden dezelfde regels als voor automobilsten. Ze mogen enkel tegen de opgelegde richting in rijden als het betreffende onderbord aanwezig is (dwz de regel is dat het NIET mag). Zie http://webshop.bivv.be/frontend/files/products/pdf/2fea42ac8b1b22e59ef8d5ea77aaf906/fietsersendewegcode.pdf, blz 27 en verder. Gilbert On 11 November 2014 11:41, Jakka vdmfrank...@gmail.com mailto:vdmfrank...@gmail.com wrote: Tried out route planner for bikes and saw in my region that the planner takes the wrong side of the road. https://graphhopper.com/maps/?__point=50.788276%2C3.133957__point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%__208930%2C%20Menin%2C%__20Belgiumvehicle=bike__elevation=truelayer=Lyrk https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=50.788276%2C3.133957point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%208930%2C%20Menin%2C%20Belgiumvehicle=bikeelevation=truelayer=Lyrk The roundabout I will correct it to oneway=yes but other roads with the lane on both side of the roads must they been change one by one to oneway=yes -- Jakka _ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-be https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
This is actually quite interesting road to dive in deeper. I notice a few problems with this roundabout. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26707718#map=19/50.78871/3.13953 There is no connection between Moeskroenstraat en the cycleway. This would pop up when Validating changes before upload. There is no bridge nor tunnel so I believe that it's wrong to not intersect these 2. Also cycleway 250518756 is missing the oneway. I think Jakka made it a lot better and after this changeset a few hours ago. That router will probably work better when they have access to this new data, unless it is not respecting the oneway tag, then it will not change. I made some corrections but left the oneway in the middle for now. Glenn ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
Glenn, ik zie nergens een cycleway op http://osm.org/go/0EgP1kjK2?m=way=109638123 ? (ook n iet in JOSM) 2014-11-11 14:52 GMT+01:00 Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be: Gilbert, Dit is geen discussie over de wegcode maar over de betekenis van tags en het resultaat ervan. Het intereseert me zelfs niet wat de wegcode ervan vindt in het kader van deze materie. Ik heb het dus niet over de wegcode maar over de betekenis van de keys. Laat dit duidelijk zijn dat hier wel af en toe een groot verschil tussen zit.. De standaard is -evenals wagens- mogen fietsers in OSM op het fietspad in 2 richtingen rijden tenzij restricties worden gelegd. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway Bij: cycleway, zoals highway kan je daar in 2 richtingen over rijden tenzij verboden. De highway tag werkt hetzelfde. Dus zonder restricties is dat de standaard. op junction=roundabout is de oneway=yes impliciet, maar niet op de aparte cycleway, dat is namelijk geen junction. Hebben jullie dit stuk al opengedaan in JOSM , het is echt wel een aparte cycleway, dus heeft geen bal te maken met die junction. Kijk naar de tags aub. Glenn On 11-11-14 13:39, Gilbert Hersschens wrote: Moet een bug in de route planner zijn. OSM vermeldt dat ronde punten impliciet éénrichtingsstraten zijn: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout (definitie: A roundabout is a /one-way/ street with /right-of-way/ and a /non-traversable http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Non-traversable/ center island.). @Glenn: kijk de wegcode nog eens na. Voor fietsers gelden dezelfde regels als voor automobilsten. Ze mogen enkel tegen de opgelegde richting in rijden als het betreffende onderbord aanwezig is (dwz de regel is dat het NIET mag). Zie http://webshop.bivv.be/frontend/files/products/pdf/2fea42ac8b1b22e59ef8d5ea77aaf906/fietsersendewegcode.pdf , blz 27 en verder. Gilbert On 11 November 2014 11:41, Jakka vdmfrank...@gmail.com mailto:vdmfrank...@gmail.com wrote: Tried out route planner for bikes and saw in my region that the planner takes the wrong side of the road. https://graphhopper.com/maps/?__point=50.788276%2C3.133957__point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%__208930%2C%20Menin%2C%__20Belgiumvehicle=bike__elevation=truelayer=Lyrk https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=50.788276%2C3.133957point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%208930%2C%20Menin%2C%20Belgiumvehicle=bikeelevation=truelayer=Lyrk The roundabout I will correct it to oneway=yes but other roads with the lane on both side of the roads must they been change one by one to oneway=yes -- Jakka _ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-be https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
On 2014-11-11 16:49, Gilbert Hersschens wrote : @André: pls read again (you provided the link yourself): Some tags (such as junction http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:junction=roundabout http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout, highway http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway=motorway http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway and others) imply *oneway*=yes and _therefore the oneway tag is optional_. Hence it doesn't need the tag oneway=yes. This is exactly what my first sentence says : A roundabout needs no oneway=yes http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Oneway#Implied_oneway_restriction. Thanks for concurring and stressing it so much. Unless, of course, it means something else. You don't say what it is. But I don't say anywhere that oneway=yes is needed anywhere anyway. André. Regards, Gilbert On 11 November 2014 14:40, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-11-11 11:41, Jakka wrote : Tried out route planner for bikes and saw in my region that the planner takes the wrong side of the road. https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=50.788276%2C3.133957point=Kortrijkstraat%2C%208930%2C%20Menin%2C%20Belgiumvehicle=bikeelevation=truelayer=Lyrk The roundabout I will correct it to oneway=yes A roundabout needs no oneway=yes http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Oneway#Implied_oneway_restriction and the bicycles must follow the same restrictions as all vehicles unless an exception is tagged http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Oneway#Sub_keys_.2F_exceptions (an exception means that the bicycles are normal vehicles without an exception). The direction of the way must be in the direction of the oneway and it looks correct. It's looks like a bug of the software. If you change the vehicle to car, it makes the same roundabout mistake. You should report it. Wonderful router you're showing. Does it use often updated data? but other roads with the lane on both side of the roads must they been change one by one to oneway=yes Do you mean a two-lane road or something else? Give the URL of an example. hope better link. (How taken a link of josm screen ? permalink?) Click FileDownload from OSMBounding Box and you have a OSM.org URL to copypaste down below. I think that's what you're asking. It's nice to see you talk here, Jakka. And thanks for the English ! ;-) André. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
I noticed my misinterpretation myself indeed - after the facts. My bad. I wasn't claiming that oneway=yes doesn't apply to cyclists, I was saying that the 'wegcode' actually allows bicycles to use the cycleway in the opposite direction. - and that was totally wrong after deeper researching. So I was trying to point out the difference between the way OSM goes about this and the real life situation. I came to the following conclusion: By default, cycleways as tagged in OSM do allow cycletraffic both ways, since they do not implicitly put oneway=yes on it. But that’s not what the .be law says... What you're claiming is correct, I was trying to point out that the keys put on the junction=roundabout do not have influence when the cycleway was drawn separately which is true in the case of this separation. Now, I only checked the situation after Jakka worked on it but didn't realise this before sending my replies, so I failed to see the initial situation where the routing problem claims applied upon. The conclusion I'm drawing from all this is that in Belgium, most seperate cycleways should probably be tagged oneway=yes. It's got everything to do with the placement of the D7/D9 signs being to the right or to the left of the sign. And then there are some exceptions as well to this rule depending on the sitation. So I checked with google streetview, and I believe that the oneway tags are now all correct on the cycleways that are located around the roundabout. And I learned something today, you can't use the cycleway in both directions by default! I always figured you could. Glenn On 11-11-14 16:46, Ben Laenen wrote: On Tuesday 11 November 2014 14:51:07 Glenn Plas wrote: Sorry but oneway=yes just means you can only drive in the direction of the way. It has nothing to do with going opposite. Yeah, sorry, used a wrong word there after I rewrote that sentence. Should have been: No, it's the opposite: oneway=yes prohibits all drivers to go in the opposite direction, whether you're driving a car, a bicycle, a horse or herding a cow or whatever your mode of transport (except on foot, you're not a driver then). since you were claiming oneway=yes doesn't apply to cyclists. Ben ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
2 problems: You're not checking the roundabout I think we were talking about. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.78823/3.14081 Check in JOSM for the latest data. The tiles do not get regenerated at the changeset rate. It will take some time to proliferate. That's exactly why we talking next to eachother. Jakka worked on it, I did a few fixes + validation. Then I fixed my own mistakes in fixing On 11-11-14 17:11, Gilbert Hersschens wrote: Glenn, ik zie nergens een cycleway op http://osm.org/go/0EgP1kjK2?m=way=109638123 ? (ook n iet in JOSM) ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
Hi, highway=cycleway is distinct from another highway=* and uses its own distinct oneway=* oneway bicycle exceptions in the same highway are described here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Oneway#Sub_keys_.2F_exceptions. The mapping of cycleway=* alongside a oneway highway=* is described here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Cycle_lanes_in_oneway_motor_car_roads. That certainly applies to implicit oneway like roundabouts except that, of course, oneway=yes must be removed. One problem of that wiki is that the same things are or are not repeated partially in several, sometimes many, places like /*oneway*/ and /*cycleway*/ and that they often do not refer to better explanations like /*Bicycle*/. André. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
On 2014-11-11 17:57, Glenn Plas wrote : ... That's exactly why we talking next to eachother. Jakka worked on it, I did a few fixes + validation. Then I fixed my own mistakes in fixing Yes, that reminds me - look at that mistake - I don't see any - that's because I corrected it Yes, please, if someone is doing something, don't rush modifying it, even if brilliantly, give him advices and let him see the effects of what he's doing and learning instead of what happens miraculously. André. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
Jakka, please do not use ways to represent lanes. The Moeskroenstraat coming from the east (before the roundabout) should not be split until you see the white divider at the last moment. Before that it should be tagged as lanes=2, turn:lanes=none|slight_right or through|slight_right I have been changing this all over Flanders in the past 6 months. Haven't done a lot in West-Vlaanderen yet. The Germans will probably have a week assignment soon to fix those kind of things in Germany. In case you understand a little German this https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_3PJBM5cOz5dUlXSUt1d29FXzg/view might be a good read regards m ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: Wonderful router you're showing. Does it use often updated data? I thought the routing data was updated daily, the map is updated more frequent. Remember that this router does not honor turn restrictions at this moment. In case you want to test that, you can use http://map.project-osrm.org/. I believe there is some beta code to integrate both routers into osm.org. regards m ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Cycleways tag as oneway=yes ?
Andre, In case you look for more routers, try this one. It's very fast, I consider it a light weight one. There still work to be done on it, not perfect but worth diving into it. http://www.routino.org Glenn On 11-11-14 19:16, Marc Gemis wrote: On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: Wonderful router you're showing. Does it use often updated data? I thought the routing data was updated daily, the map is updated more frequent. Remember that this router does not honor turn restrictions at this moment. In case you want to test that, you can use http://map.project-osrm.org/. I believe there is some beta code to integrate both routers into osm.org http://osm.org. regards m ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
